Transcription

1 NRC s Program for Remediating Polluted Sites J.T. Greeves, D.A. Orlando, J.T. Buckley, G.N. Gnugnoli, R.L. Johnson US Nuclear Regulatory Commission Background The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) regulates the decontamination and decommissioning of commercial materials and fuel cycle facilities, power reactors, research and test reactors, and uranium recovery facilities, with the ultimate goal of license termination. Approximately 300 materials licenses (for hospitals, research labs etc) are terminated each year. Most of these license terminations are routine, and the sites require little, if any, remediation to meet NRC s unrestricted release criteria. The NRC Headquarters Complex Site Decommissioning Program includes termination of licenses that are not routine because the sites involve more complex decommissioning activities. Currently, there are 47 materials facilities, 7 fuel cycle facilities, 20 nuclear power reactors, 15 research and test reactors, and 16 uranium recovery facilities that are undergoing non-routine decommissioning or are in long-term safe storage. In 1989 the U.S. General Accounting Office (USGAO) (the investigative agency of the U.S. Congress) issued a report which raised concerns about USNRC's criteria and procedures used for the decommissioning of formerly licensed sites. Some of these sites were previously decommissioned, but later were found to have unacceptable levels of contamination. As a result, in 1990, the USNRC decided to undertake a review of terminated materials licenses to assure that previously licensed facilities were properly decontaminated and posed no threat to public health and safety. Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL) was contracted to review all materials licenses terminated by the USNRC or its predecessor agencies, from the inception of material regulation, to: (1) identify sites with the potential for meaningful residual contamination, based on information in the license documentation; and (2) to identify sealed sources with incomplete or no accounting that could represent a public hazard. ORNL examined in excess of 37,000 license files terminated through From its evaluation of these license files, ORNL identified approximately 675 loose material licenses (i.e., radioactive material that was authorized for use in an unsealed form) and 565 sealed source licenses that required further review. The USNRC Regional offices either performed a followup review, or transferred responsibility for the follow-up review to the appropriate Agreement State authorized to regulate such material. As a result of the ORNL review, and subsequent follow-up by the USNRC Regional offices, 42 formerly licensed sites were found to have residual contamination levels exceeding USNRC's criteria for unrestricted release. After successful remediation, 19 sites have since been closed, and 11 have been closed by transfer to Agreement States or a Federal entity. Twelve sites under USNRC jurisdiction remain open pending remediation, and are a portion of the Complex Site Decommissioning Program today. Several Agreement States continue to evaluate license files transferred to them under this project. Approximately 70 files remain to be reviewed. USNRC established a grant program to provide financial assistance to Agreement States to support reviews of outstanding USNRC formerly licensed files. Since the grant program began in January 2001, two sites have been found to have contamination levels exceeding USNRC's unrestricted release criteria.

2 ORNL has developed a web-based database for the USNRC to document the evaluation and closure process for all 37,000 terminated license files. This database will also be used to track the licenses terminated each year by USNRC. The database was completed in December ORNL has been contracted to maintain and update the database beyond 2002 so that a permanent record of decommissioning will be available for future reference. The database can be found at The framework for the complex site decommissioning program was created in response to direction from the Commission to develop a comprehensive strategy for achieving closure of decommissioning issues in a timely manner, and to develop a list of contaminated sites, in order of cleanup priority. In addition to tracking cleanup of priority sites the Commission directed the staff to develop regulations and guidance to support site decommissioning and termination. Over the next ten years the staff developed regulations and guidance to implement the Commission direction. Important steps in the process included the following actions: 1) Technical and financial criteria for Decommissioning licensed nuclear facilities, 1988; 2) Additional record keeping requirements for decommissioning 1993; 3) Time frames and schedules for the decommissioning of licensed nuclear facilities, 1994; 4) Clarification of decommissioning financial assurance requirements, 1996; 5) Decommissioning Procedures for nuclear power reactors, 1996; and 6) Radiological criteria for license termination, Staff also developed NUREG 1757 Consolidated NMSS Decommissioning Guidance [1] to provide guidance for staff and licensees decommissioning non-reactor sites and NUREG 1700, revision 1 Standard Review Plan for Evaluating Nuclear Power Reactor License Termination Plans [2] (LTPs) to provide guidance for staff and licensees developing power reactor license termination plans. On July 21, 1997, the USNRC published its regulation on Radiological Criteria for License Termination (the License Termination Rule or LTR) as Subpart E to 10 CFR Part 20 [3]. This regulation authorized cleanup criteria for the termination of licenses without restrictions on future site use. This regulation also set forth the requirements for the termination of licenses with restrictions on future site use. It is the primary regulation for site cleanup. Decommissioning program activities include: (1) developing regulations and guidance to assist staff and the regulated community; (2) conducting research to develop data, techniques, and models used to assess public exposure from the release of radioactive material resulting from site decommissioning; (3) reviewing and approving decommissioning plans and license termination plans; (4) reviewing and approving license amendment requests; (5) inspecting licensed and non-licensed facilities undergoing decommissioning; (6) developing environmental assessments (EAs) and environmental impact statements (EISs) to support the USNRC's reviews of DPs and LTPs; (7) reviewing and approving final site survey reports; and (8) conducting confirmatory surveys. USNRC decommissioning regulations require that a Decommissioning Plan (DP) be submitted by a licensee to support the decommissioning of its facility when it is required by license -2-

3 condition, or if the procedures and activities necessary to carry out the decommissioning have not been approved by USNRC and these procedures could increase the potential health and safety impacts to the workers or the public. The objective of the decommissioning plan is to describe the activities and procedures that the licensee intends to undertake to remove residual radioactive material at the facility to levels that meet USNRC criteria for release of the site and termination of the radioactive materials license. The USNRC has implemented several actions to incorporate risk considerations in its decommissioning program. The staff described its risk-informed approach to compliance and reviews in NUREG-1757 [1]. This document focuses attention and resources, of both the licensee and staff, on the more risk-significant aspects of decommissioning. The approach includes prioritization of staff review and inspection resources based on risk insights, quantifying uncertainty, conducting sensitivity analysis, and identifying radionuclides and exposure pathways that are significant to risk. The staff developed a graded approach for defining the scope of decommissioning actions that need to be taken, by licensees and NRC, according to the relative risk and complexity of the decommissioning. This includes using more realistic dose modeling scenarios. For example, the staff used an industrial use scenario at a site where the licensee was bankrupt. Site-specific cleanup criteria were developed so that limited available decommissioning funds could be used to remove the most risk significant concentrations of radioactive material at the site first. The staff also uses risk ranking to prioritize inspections at both decommissioning and operating facilities. Financial risk ranking has been used to identify decommissioning sites that require a more aggressive regulatory approach to prevent future legacy sites. Materials Facilities Approximately 300 materials licenses are terminated each year. Most of these license terminations are routine and the sites require little, if any, remediation to meet the USNRC s unrestricted release criteria. However, each year a few sites present complex technical and policy challenges which will require large expenditures of staff resources. In addition a limited number of sites are expected to request license termination under the restricted-use provisions of USNRC s regulations. For example, for some sites, site-specific dose assessments, including complex groundwater modeling, will be required, while at others requesting release with restrictions on future site use, "durable institutional controls," as specified in USNRC s regulations will need to be provided to ensure protection of the public health and safety. Currently, there are 47 materials facilities undergoing non-routine decommissioning. Twentyfour complex decommissioning sites have been removed after successful remediation. In addition, 11 sites have been transferred to an Agreement State or the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) for further action. USNRC also provides licensing oversight and decommissioning project management to fuel cycle facilities, including conversion plants, enrichment plants, and fuel manufacturing plants. Most of these facilities have been in operation for 20 or more years. As technology improves and operations at these facilities change, there are often unused areas on the site with residual contamination. Any licensee with a building or outdoor area, with residual contamination, that has not been in use for two years, must begin decommissioning, submit a DP, or request an extension to the time period for submitting a DP. -3-

4 In 2003, one conversion facility (Honeywell), and four fuel manufacturers (BWX Technologies, Nuclear Fuel Services, Framatome Richland, and General Atomics), although still operating, are conducting some decommissioning activities. Uranium Mill Tailings The USNRC authority for uranium (or thorium) mill sites was established in Title II of the Uranium Mill Tailings Radiation Control Act (UMTRCA) of 1978 [4]. USNRC and the Agreement States that are authorized to regulated mill tailings (Colorado, Illinois, Texas, and Washington) oversee decommissioning at licensed sites. USNRC provides project management and technical review for decommissioning and reclamation of conventional uranium mills and other facilities that process ore primarily for its source material content, such as uranium in situ leach, heap leach, and ion-exchange facilities. The U.S. Department of Energy (USDOE) was authorized to remediate 24 designated abandoned uranium mill sites, with State and USNRC concurrence on remedial plans, activities, and completion reports. USNRC also was authorized to concur in the long-term surveillance plan for each site and place it under general license to USDOE, when remediation was complete. Currently, there are 17 USNRC-licensed mill tailings sites in decommissioning. At four of these sites, USNRC has concurred with USDOE ground-water restoration plans (two active and two natural flushing), and five other site plans are under review. USNRC has also concurred that no ground-water remediation is required at nine sites. The surface decommissioning at all of these sites is complete. Power Reactors Currently has NRC regulatory project management responsibility for 17 decommissioning power reactors. In addition, decommissioning for three early demonstration reactors-vallecitos, Nuclear Ship Savannah, and Saxton is under review. During the past year USNRC completed the review and approval of License Termination Plans (LTPs) for Maine Yankee, Saxton, and Connecticut Yankee. The staff currently is reviewing the LTP for Big Rock Point, which was submitted in April Currently, 11 research and test reactors have decommissioning orders or amendments. Additionally, four research and test reactors are in "possession-only" status, either waiting for shutdown of another research or test reactor at the site, or for removal of the fuel from the site by the USDOE. Further, 4 of the 11 test and research reactors with decommissioning orders or amendments, and 1 of the 4 test and research reactors in possession-only status still have fuel in storage at the reactor. Current Issues The USNRC s experience with the 1997 License Termination Rule (LTR) has revealed some important implementation issues impacting the decommissioning of sites. In June 2002 the Commission directed the staff to conduct an analysis of issues associated with implementing -4-

5 the LTR, emphasizing resolution of the institutional control issues and with the goal of making the LTR provision for restricted release more available for licensee use. This Commission direction was in response to both the continuing uncertainty about potential transfer of sites to USDOE for long-term control under the Nuclear Waste Policy Act, and the potential need for restricting site use at one of the complex sites. The Commission also identified other important LTR implementation issues impacting the decommissioning of sites. These issues included: determining the appropriate relationship between the LTR limits and other release limits in USNRC s regulations; the relationship between the LTR and USNRC s regulations allowing onsite disposal of radioactive waste; the appropriateness of developing an alternative unrestricted release standard for uranium and thorium sites; determining the relationship between the LTR and the control of solid materials (clearance); development of realistic exposure scenarios, and; measures to prevent future legacy sites. In October 2002, the staff provided the Commission with an initial analysis [5] that described the scope of each issue and the staff s plans for evaluation and the final results of the staff s analysis of LTR issues were provided in May 2003 [6]. The staff s evaluations considered a wide range of relevant information and experience from other USNRC programs and regulations, as well as external sources, such as the USEPA; U.S. USDOE; Agreement States; and US National Research Council reports. Similarly, extensive coordination among USNRC staff was conducted to gain further information and perspective, as well as to identify interrelationships among the individual issues. Particular emphasis was given to recommendations to resolve the restricted release issue, and an update to DOE s changes to its long-term stewardship policy and management. The staff also evaluated the other LTR implementation issues discussed above. The staff recommended a variety of actions for Commission consideration, to address these issues, including: 1) a rulemaking, for measures to prevent future legacy sites; 2) revised guidance to support the rulemaking and to clarify restricted release, on-site burials, and realistic exposure scenarios; 3) revised inspection procedures and enforcement guidance to enhance monitoring, reporting, and remediation, to prevent future legacy sites; and 4) a Regulatory Issue Summary to inform a wide range of stakeholders about the LTR analysis of each issue, Commission direction, and actions planned to resolve each issue. For the new issue on intentional mixing, only planned evaluations were given. The results of these evaluations will be provided to the Commission in early The outcomes of the staff s recommendations affect both existing and future decommissioning sites. For existing decommissioning sites, particularly the complex sites with long-lived radionuclides, many recommendations should facilitate decommissioning by addressing key challenges that these sites must address. Consistent use of more realistic exposure scenarios could result in more economical decommissioning, while maintaining safety. Furthermore, this recommendation could also result in fewer sites that might need to use the restricted release or alternate criteria. However, for those few sites that might still need to use the restricted-release or alternate criteria provisions of the LTR, viable options for restricting use are recommended that include a continuing role for USNRC at the site. For future decommissioning sites, specific measures are recommended for financial assurance, licensee operations and reporting, and on-site disposal, that should reduce or mitigate the potential for future "legacy" sites that may not have the financial ability to complete decommissioning. Together, these measures -5-

6 contribute to the Commission s preference for license termination, with unrestricted release, which results in the greatest opportunity to return the site to productive use. Decommissioning funding is one issue that will continue to require future Commission attention. The Commission previously asked the staff to analyze decommissioning funding issues in Agreement States and non-agreement States. Staff currently is administering a grant program to facilitate cleanup of formerly terminated USNRC sites in Agreement States. Similarly, staff conducted a financial analysis of decommissioning sites in non-agreement States, and reported its findings in May The decommissioning of nuclear facilities pose some of the most challenging policy and technical issues facing regulators and the nuclear industry today. In addition to concerns about the appropriate level of residual radioactivity that may remain at a site upon completion of decommissioning, concerns have surfaced about the appropriate level of radioactivity that may be present in building materials and on equipment that are released from a site during decommissioning (i.e., clearance). Although the United States has established dose-based criteria for the release of nuclear sites at the end of site use, it has not yet established national requirements for the clearance of materials and commodities. The regulatory framework for decommissioning and material release is not complete. This has resulted in US regulators having to evaluate licensee s clearance requests on a site-specific basis, as opposed to relying on a uniform, national clearance standard. This approach is time consuming and inefficient, does not guarantee that consistent dose standards are applied by the various Federal and State regulatory authorities, and does not meet our goal to maintain the public s confidence that they are adequately protected from ionizing radiation. Much of this information is documented in a recent National Academies of Science Report [7]. Adequate Public Health and Safety Standards that are based on the risk of the release and encompass a graded approach to implementation, are needed to address the safety, technical and resource challenges associated with decommissioning, site release and clearance. It is also important to have realistic implementation approaches in order to address these challenges. The international community faces a daunting challenge when addressing these issues. The need for a graded approach has long been recognized, especially from the radiation protection principles perspective, in order to address the inherent differences in emergency response, worker protection, and limits to public exposure. We must balance expending operator and regulatory resources needed to avert doses that lie far below the recognized and recommended safe range with the associated cost and consequences to society. In order to fully comprehend the challenges associated with setting standards for decommissioning, site release and clearance we must be prepared to answer the following question, "What is the cost of such actions and what is the benefit or return?" The Joint Convention on the Safety of Spent Fuel Management and the Safety of Radioactive Waste Management can provide a forum for bringing harmony to the regulatory systems either in place or those being developed or modified to address environmental cleanup and clearance. In addition, the international community is developing recommendations on radiological criteria for the removal of regulatory control from materials, equipment and sites (Publications of the -6-

7 European Commission, International Atomic Energy Agency [IAEA] Nuclear Energy Agency, etc.). USNRC and other U.S. Federal agencies have been very active in the international arena in terms of clearance and the control of radioactive sources. The USNRC is evaluating a graded approach for clearance for materials in the range of a few 10s of µsv/a. This would establish a complete radiation protection framework that would include separate criteria for environmental remediation and clearance of materials. Conclusion The USNRC's decommissioning program includes oversight and management of a wide variety of simple and complex facilities and includes the development of guidance and rules to facilitate the safe and timely decommissioning of these facilities. Addressing the challenges inherent in the management of complex decommissioning sites has and will continue to be a major program in USNRC. REFERENCES 1. U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, NUREG-1757 "Consolidated NMSS Decommissioning Guidance" Vols 1-3, September U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, NUREG-1700 "Standard Review Plan for Evaluating Nuclear Power Reactor License Termination Plans, Revision 1", April U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, U.S. Code of Federal Regulations 10 CFR Part 20, et al, "Radiological Criteria for License Termination; Final Rule" Federal Register Vol. 62, July 21, 1997, Uranium Mill tailings Radiation Control Act of 1978 Public Law [H.R. I3650] 5. U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, SECY "Initial Analysis and Plan for Addressing License Termination Rule Issues" October 1, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, SECY "Results of the License Termination Rule Analysis" May 2, National Research Council/ National Academy of Sciences, "The Disposition Dilemma: Controlling the Release of Solid Materials from Nuclear Regulatory Commission- Licensed Facilities," National Academy Press,

RC-17 Radiation Protection in Waste Management and Disposal Implementing the Joint Convention on the Safety of Spent Fuel Management and on the Safety of Radioactive Waste Management Alejandro V. Nader

International Action Plan On The Decommissioning of Nuclear Facilities A. Introduction Decommissioning is defined by the International Atomic Energy Agency (the Agency) as the administrative and technical

MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING BETWEEN THE ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY AND THE NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION CONSULTATION AND FINALITY ON DECOMMISSIONING AND DECONTAMINATION OF CONTAMINATED SITES I. Introduction

PAGE 1 OF 6 PAGES Pursuant to the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended, the Energy Reorganization Act of 1974 (Public Law 93-438), and the applicable parts of Title 10, Code of Federal Regulations, Chapter

NRC FORM 374 U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION Page 1 of 5 Pursuant to the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended, the Energy Reorganization Act of 1974 (Public Law 93-438), and Title 10, Code of Federal

CRCPD PART N TENORM IMPLEMENTATION GUIDANCE T. Cardwell, Texas Department of Health ABSTRACT In 1998, the Conference of Radiation Control Program Directors, Inc. (CRCPD) adopted Part N of the Suggested

Information Sheet: Radiation Source Use and Replacement Study Background Radiation sources are used extensively in the United States for industrial applications, research, and medical diagnosis and treatment.

GOVERNMENT OF INDIA Policies Governing Regulation of Nuclear and Radiation Safety ATOMIC ENERGY REGULATORY BOARD July 2014 This page is intentionally left blank i Policies Governing Regulation of Nuclear

What is the issue before the Board? WASTE MANAGEMENT AND RADIATION CONTROL BOARD Executive Summary Amendments to Rules R313-15, R313-19, R313-22, and R313-24 December 10, 2015 This proposed change amends

This Citizen s Guide provides an overview of the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, the information we produce, and how to obtain it. To learn more about our programs and activities, visit our Web site

DOE/IG-0468 AUDIT REPORT FACILITIES INFORMATION MANAGEMENT SYSTEM APRIL 2000 U.S. DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERAL OFFICE OF AUDIT SERVICES April 26, 2000 MEMORANDUM FOR THE SECRETARY FROM:

ASSAf STATEMENT ON NUCLEAR ENERGY SAFETY MAY 2012 INTRODUCTION Both public and political attitudes on the introduction and use of nuclear energy change with time and events. A movement towards extending

IAEA NUCLEAR SECURITY SERIES NO. FUNDAMENTALS OF A STATE S NUCLEAR SECURITY REGIME: OBJECTIVE AND ESSENTIAL ELEMENTS Revision 17.04 Page 1 of 20 FOREWORD [TO BE PROVIDED BY THE SECRETARIAT AT A LATER TIME]

NRC FORM 374 U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION PAGE 1 OF 4 PAGES Amendment No.1 Pursuant to the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended, the Energy Reorganization Act of 1974 (Public Law 93-438), and Title

July 2013 Risk-Based Decision Making for Site Cleanup The Oklahoma Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) has adopted a risk based decision making process to provide a framework for determining cleanup

Questionnaire for NORM service providers This questionnaire is intended for institutes and companies providing services relevant for NORM industries in Belgium. Its objective is to give to Belgian NORM

Financial Security: Three Texas Case Studies or The Great Texas Security Chase Ruth E. McBurney, CHP Texas Department of Health Case 1: The Case of the Missing Management In Situ Uranium Company in Decommissioning

Orders of Interest to the Board Group 1. Currently Active Orders Order Number Title O151.1C Comprehensive Emergency Management System O153.1 Departmental Radiological Emergency Response Assets O210.2 DOE

NRC FORM 374 U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION PAGE 1 OF 5 PAGES Pursuant to the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended, the Energy Reorganization Act of 1974 (Public Law 93-438), and Title 10, Code of

UNIVERSITY OF NORTH FLORIDA HAZARDOUS MATERIALS MANAGEMENT PROGRAMS General Requirements and Organizational Responsibility All hazardous and potentially hazardous materials are required to be procured,

GAO For Release on Delivery Expected at 10:00 a.m. EDT Tuesday, May 20, 2008 United States Government Accountability Office Testimony before the Subcommittee on Energy and Air Quality, Committee on Energy

DD-01-01 United States of America Nuclear Regulatory Commission Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards William F. Kane, Director In the Matter of U.S. DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE Docket No. 030-28641

NRC FORM 374 U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION Page 1 of 8 Pursuant to the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended, the Energy Reorganization Act of 1974 (Public Law 93-438), and Title 10, Code of Federal

Licensing Process for New Nuclear Power Plants in Canada INFO-0756 (Revision 1) May 2008 Licensing Process for New Nuclear Power Plants in Canada Minister of Public Works and Government Services Canada

CITY CLERK MEMORANDUM 15-70 DATE: November 12,2015 TQ: Honorable Mayor and Members of City Council FROM: Bruce Applegate, Acting City Clerk SUBJECT: ADDITIONS TO THE NOVEMBER 16, 2015 CITY COUNCIL AGENDA

Chemical Waste Management Legal Issues and You Jamey Cecil Manager, Environmental Management Brigham Young University What will we cover today Resource Conservation and Recovery Act Define the common waste

FOREWORD In recent years there has been a growing awareness of the potential for accidents involving radiation sources, some such accidents having had serious, even fatal, consequences. More recently still,

This document is scheduled to be published in the Federal Register on 12/23/2016 and available online at https://federalregister.gov/d/2016-29930, and on FDsys.gov NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION [NRC-2016-0186]

Draft Technical Basis for a Rulemaking to Revise the Security Requirements for Facilities Storing Spent Nuclear Fuel and High-Level Radioactive Waste, Revision 1 [NRC-2009-0558] A The Objectives of this

GAO United States General Accounting Office Testimony Before the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources, U.S. Senate For Release on Delivery Expected at 9:00 a.m. CST Saturday, December 6, 2003 NUCLEAR

Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission Commission canadienne de sûreté nucléaire Uranium Mining and Production: Part of a National Nuclear Regulatory Statute Lisa Thiele Senior General Counsel and Director,

New Proposed Department of Energy Rules to Clarify and Update Part 810 I. Introduction By Shannon MacMichael and Michael Lieberman of Steptoe & Johnson, LLP 1 Since April 2010, when former U.S. Secretary

TOOLS FOR CLOSURE PROJECT AND CONTRACT MANAGEMENT: DEVELOPMENT OF THE ROCKY FLATS INTEGRATED CLOSURE PROJECT BASELINE C.M. Gelles, F.R. Sheppard United States Department of Energy Office of Environmental